Jump to content
MSFN is made available via donations, subscriptions and advertising revenue. The use of ad-blocking software hurts the site. Please disable ad-blocking software or set an exception for MSFN. ×

MircoSoft is going Crazy


Recommended Posts

i also think that MS should at least give people a choice in license. those enthusiasts who change their hardware more often, should be able to get a license that costs more but doesnt restrict the amount of hardware changes allowed.

actually, as "-I-" points out, thats the case already with windows XP.

also there are even more restrictions in this license than what you have discussed in this thread. All editions of vista (except the ultimate and maybe the business edition) can not be controlled by "remote desktop". the only remote access feature that is allowed is "remote assistance". that means that a user has to be logged on already and maybe he also has to confirm the remote assistance.

something else that will probably bug alot of people on this board is the fact that the license does not allow you to create iso images, or copy the contents of the installation DVD to a hard drive. only the ultimate edition is an exception.

Edited by what3v3r
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey, if I buy a retail copy of Vista the license for use belongs to me, not the hardware.

Moving and upgrading should be allowed as long as only 1 working copy of the OS exists.

I'm sure under UK consumer law these restrictions will not be legally enforcable.

Edited by tim
Link to post
Share on other sites

All these draconian measures will do is force more and more people to pirate corporate copies to avoid the activation BS, just like with XP, so basically, nothing has changed.

Edit:

but it is hard to use Corp versions of Vista

isn't it available only in controlled manner ???

all corps has to tell m$ how many no. of systems activated/to be activated by that key

and activation is a must

STILL

sombdy will copy vista

sombdy will make a keygen

sombdy will make an antiwpa,antiwga....

everyby else goin to use it

that's it - nothing changed from XP

:D :D :D

Afterall m$ want vista 2 be pirated bcoz its their prestige OS after 5 yrs

so ppl atleast work with it (get used to with it )and once it becoms a *nacessary* ,

m$ will make some hotfix to block all pirated keys (like did with XP for FCKG***** in sp1)

Edited by Innocent Devil
Link to post
Share on other sites
All these draconian measures will do is force more and more people to pirate corporate copies to avoid the activation BS, just like with XP, so basically, nothing has changed.

corporate CD keys will have the same activation scheme as home users, corporate keys will no longer be a the honor system when it comes to activation. they will either go out to microsofts site to activate or go out to a domain activation server

Link to post
Share on other sites

The copy you buy still belongs to you, its the intellectual property (Vista in this case) that doesn't belong to you - its always been this way. But your right - almost - about the license in a way - if you buy the copy of Vista then yes, you purchased a product so the product belongs to you, but the license doesn't belong to you as it only describes the agreement between you and MS for use of their intellectual property. So the physical product medium belongs to you but the intellectual property still belongs to MS. Its the same with about 99.9999 % of any other software you purchase that has a license agreement (EULA) with it.

The thing about the Vista license, however, is that MS is now 'clarifying' (yeah right) ,so they say, their rights over the intellectual property by limiting your use of their intellectual property rights to only the first install and activation and then only one more time after that for a total of two times for two different 'devices'. There seems to be a problem in defining 'devices' from the various articles. According to the license a 'device' doesn't just mean what we consider a computer as its not clearly defined what 'device' means in the license. I don't think 'device' means to me what it means to others, and others may have a different definition also. The various web sites like the Win Super Site were quick to jump on the MS bandwagon stating that it just like that in WinXP and MS was just 'clarifying' (which wasn't true because the winXP license was not like the Vista license, clarifications or not) without fully exploring the implications.

So part of the problem becomes; if MS said for example that 'device' means a computer then whats the definition of computer in terms of the license? Is it the original computer at the time of the first install? Is the original computer the first install and activation occured on still the original computer in terms of the license if you change a processor and later re-install and activate? Is the computer any computer we happen to be using at the time if you consider it in terms of "well I bought a copy for use on MY computer"? Is computer any computer you own that you can call yours in terms of "well I bought a copy for use on MY computer"?

Lions and tigers and bears, Oh My! You could get a headache from trying to describe all the different things a 'device' might be under the Vista license. Its true, that at first glance without really reading the license in depth one might be tempted to simply say "OK, same old stuff, nothing has changed". The truth is nothing could be further from home plate here - the Vista license is nothing like the XP license. Oh sure, there are some of the standard things, but when you begin to really look at the Vista license in its whole context and the implications of the "clarifications" and "devices" you quickly realize that this license is nothing like the XP license and effectively begins to control your rights to ownership over your own computers simply for using a product that you legitimately purchased in the beginning. Even if you never changed any hardware, re-installed, or did anything that caused you to re-activate, the Vista license still infringes upon your ownership rights by removing or limiting that possibility.

Its like buying a new engine for your car, if you put a new engine in but you need to pay a fee to the manufacturer to keep using the car because you put a new engine in then wheres your rights to ownership to do with your property as you choose without penality (excluding of course endangering someone or breaking a law)? And thats exactly what this Vista license does, even if you never need to activate again, it infringes upon your rights to ownership by limiting and penalizing you if you attempt to exercise unlimited control over your computer in terms of hardware changes that might need activation.

Hey, if I buy a retail copy of Vista the license for use belongs to me, not the hardware.

Moving and upgrading should be allowed as long as only 1 working copy of the OS exists.

I'm sure under UK consumer law these restrictions will not be legally enforcable.

Not really so i don't think, the license says that you can make a copy for your own use, but never describes what 'copy' is - so it could be an .iso, or a copy of the DVD to the hard drive - all thse are 'copies'

something else that will probably bug alot of people on this board is the fact that the license does not allow you to create iso images, or copy the contents of the installation DVD to a hard drive. only the ultimate edition is an exception.

there is no more 'Corp' versions starting with Vista, there are only different activation schemes. So you can't for example make an un-attended install that you do not need to activate.

"STILL

sombdy will copy vista

sombdy will make a keygen

sombdy will make an antiwpa,antiwga....

everyby else goin to use it

that's it - nothing changed from XP "

Hmmm, not really:

"sombdy will copy vista" - someone already has, you can make your own copy, the license permits it.

"sombdy will make a keygen" - probably, but then it will not do any good because if you remember when activation was introduced for XP that MS started hashing the machine info with the key - so a keygen is going to be useless unless you install on a different machine each time because the machine info in the hash will give it away and MS probably will not let that key activate and black list it so this effectively negates any keygen because MS now uses all that hash info so a key alone isn't going to do it.

"that's it - nothing changed from XP" - wait until you change computers more then twice or change hardware that requires activation - plenty has changed.

All these draconian measures will do is force more and more people to pirate corporate copies to avoid the activation BS, just like with XP, so basically, nothing has changed.

Edit:

but it is hard to use Corp versions of Vista

isn't it available only in controlled manner ???

all corps has to tell m$ how many no. of systems activated/to be activated by that key

and activation is a must

STILL

sombdy will copy vista

sombdy will make a keygen

sombdy will make an antiwpa,antiwga....

everyby else goin to use it

that's it - nothing changed from XP

:D :D :D

Afterall m$ want vista 2 be pirated bcoz its their prestige OS after 5 yrs

so ppl atleast work with it (get used to with it )and once it becoms a *nacessary* ,

m$ will make some hotfix to block all pirated keys (like did with XP for FCKG***** in sp1)

Edited by Spooky
Link to post
Share on other sites
"sombdy will make a keygen" - probably, but then it will not do any good because if you remember when activation was introduced for XP that MS started hashing the machine info with the key - so a keygen is going to be useless unless you install on a different machine each time because the machine info in the hash will give it away and MS probably will not let that key activate and black list it so this effectively negates any keygen because MS now uses all that hash info so a key alone isn't going to do it.
That line should've been "sombdy will make a crack". What I find most amusing is the fact that by changing one or two bytes in a file or two, it is possible to defeat the entire mound of "protection" and validation schemes that M$ has developed :lol:

Edit: Make that "somebdy has made a crack" :P

Edited by LLXX
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, yeah maybe it should have read that - didn't think about it that way.

Personally, i'm for some form of anti-piracy control/measures/prevention because I personally have seen the effects it has had on my own business - it ain't pretty. But I am not in favor of these overbearing, heavy handed, as some say 'draconian', absolutly stupid, short-sighted and ill-conceived measures introduced in the Vista license. These seek control over ownership of ones computer system, and introduce a continuing profit source for MS on products already sold (which I may add is illegal in about 50 states) - its more like paying rent then buying to own, all under the banner of anti-piracy. This does nothing to prevent piracy, only encourages it because most hackers love a challenge at one time or another, and penalizes the owner of the computer in the future.

I'm waiting for the newspaper story - headline "12 year old kid defeats the MS anti-piracy efforts" - the story; "Today a 12 year old computer hacker released a legitimate software package that completly defeats the MS anti-piracy efforts. Little Johnny said "yeah, I did it...ya wanna see my new X-Box?"

Whats MS going to do then - bring out its mighty legal eagles and try to explain to a jury what a 'device' is?

Like I said, i'm all for some form of anti-piracy control/measures/prevention, but I am not for something that is still going to do nothing at all and serves only to penalize the legitimate user and have to pay for the "Windows Experience" too. Most of us at one time or another have been screwed and not kissed, well this time they aren't even bothering to use a condom, and forget about the kiss.

"sombdy will make a keygen" - probably, but then it will not do any good because if you remember when activation was introduced for XP that MS started hashing the machine info with the key - so a keygen is going to be useless unless you install on a different machine each time because the machine info in the hash will give it away and MS probably will not let that key activate and black list it so this effectively negates any keygen because MS now uses all that hash info so a key alone isn't going to do it.
That line should've been "sombdy will make a crack". What I find most amusing is the fact that by changing one or two bytes in a file or two, it is possible to defeat the entire mound of "protection" and validation schemes that M$ has developed :lol:

Edit: Make that "somebdy has made a crack" :P

Link to post
Share on other sites

[snipped]M$'s software is just taking space on my hard drive, perhaps I should charge them rent... :wacko:

Good point!

Good point? By that logic, most software companies owe me money, electronics companies owe me money for their products occupy space in my living room, oil companies owe me money for using up space in my car's tank, etc. :rolleyes:

Link to post
Share on other sites
software shouldn't be that expensive? :blink::lol:

Disagree on the balancing part, but agree on the last bit I quoted somewhat. They're releasing some very nice free stuff lately - just look at all the "Express Edition" products (IDEs) and SQL Server 2005 Express! (And lots of other very nice things like the .NET frameworks/SDKs/compilers/EntLib/WSE/etc are free too). Most of their other stuff is priced very competitively: SQL Server is much cheaper than Oracle/DB2 in most cases (same goes for most of their enterprise soft), and products like Encarta and Streets & Trips are priced much like the competition.

They really only have 2 pricey products I can think of:

-MS Office. Really nice, powerful, advanced and all (FAR better than all the other office suites), but $$$ indeed...

-Windows - sort of. XP Home OEM is pretty cheap (96$CDN last I checked). Also it costs nearly nothing to OEMs like Dell to bundle it on systems. Vista Retail is on the expensive side I must admit. Vista Ultimate Retail costs almost 100$ more than Windows 2003 R2 Standard(!), and I already found that a bit expensive (for dev & testing use - not as a production server). But the thing that bothers me the most is the price of Vista Home Basic - the "good enough for basic home users" version @ 250$ or so IIRC, which is nearly 3 times more than XP Home OEM costs. The basic edition should be WAY cheaper. I know LOTS of people who bought a legit copy of XP lately (WGA was bothersome, and 100$ is no big deal), but Vista's price... Not sure if they would have - even the upgrade versions of Vista are more expensive than XP is! I'm a bit scared to see how LH Server will cost (I need a uncrippled IIS7) - thanks god for the action pack...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...